Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MontageJS
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 06:07, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- MontageJS (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Currently unreferenced save for an arstechnica piece written by the creators of the framework. Searches on Google result in either Yellowpages-style listings or Githubs. Books return in trivial mentions in author biographies. The fact that the author was SPA on this topic does not help. For these reasons I believe it fails GNG. Good day—RetroCosmos talk 04:21, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering, Technology, Computing, and Software. Good day—RetroCosmos talk 04:21, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Just looked at their website. Copyright 2017. Another framework that didn't get off the ground. — Sean Brunnock (talk) 14:41, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.